Relevance. Guidelines for Risk Assessment of the impact of physical factors on health personnel are developed by experts from different countries [2, 6, 8]. The legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan does not define the obligation of such an assessment, it remains unclear theoretical and practical significance.
Literature review. Risk assessment of the impact of air pollutants on human health apply for workplaces and residential areas [1, 9]. Method limitation are health impact assessment only chemicals excluding physical, biological and psycho-physiological impacts.
BS 8800 Appendix E [2] recommends development of enterprise risk management program to ensure its safety and to obtain stable profits.
Semi-quantitative theory of identification, assessment and mitigation of workplace hazards and risks in relation to all pollutants, found its use abroad in the occupational health and safety [6].
The general principles of risk assessment and management was developed in the international standard ISO 31000:2009 [4], Russian state standard R 12.0.006-2002 [3] and Standard Republic of Kazakhstan12.0.002-2010 [10].
A series of Russian standards for risk includes about 200 methodological, institutional, industrial documents.
Law of the Republic in Kazakhstan No. 188-V dated April 11, 2014 [5], adopted the concept of risk reduction at hazardous industrial facilities without quantitative assessment criteria. ”Methodological Recommendations” [8] (hereinafter referred to as — MR No.46) determine milestones to quantify the risk of occupational diseases development among personnel, hazard class of an industrial facility. However, there is no methodology of development of risk management measures and assessment of their efficiency, which limits the practical use of this concept.
The aim of the study To analyze and evaluate the risk of occupational disease personnel from exposure to physical factors determine the hazard class of each production facility and assess the effectiveness of the developed activities.
Objectives of the study were:
— to define the method for the calculation of the risk of occupational diseases development on the example of physical factors impact on employees health from industrial facility,
— to determine the method for the calculation to determine the hazard class of industrial facilities,
— to offer the methods of dynamic assessment of effectiveness of measures to improve labor conditions developed on the basis of results of WLCCC.
Methods of the study. Methods of mathematical and theoretical analysis were applied to calculate the risks of physical factors impact on the employee health. The analytical method was used to develop measures to mitigate risks. Also, the method of assessment of the economic effectiveness while implementing measures developed during the first year after certification.
Results of the study. It was established that of the 223 employees of the production facility where attestation workplaces was completed, 165 people work in the optimal and acceptable working conditions. Harmful working conditions on the physical, chemical and psychophysiological effects of class 3.1 installed on 26 locations, class 3.2 — 22 places.
Harmful working conditions was identified on the factors of influence:
-electromagnetic fields (EMF). On 11 workplaces defined class 3.1 and 18 places — class 3.2;
-noise. On 4 workplaces defined class 3.2 working conditions;
-illumination. On 13 workplaces defined class 3.1;
— high temperature. 2 workplaces defined class 3.1.
Calculation of labor conditions hazard index entire industrial facilities (LCHI) — was made according to the formula (1) of the MR No.46:
Where,
ni — the number of workplaces production facility in the i class working conditions.
Ri — the numerical value of the i-th class working conditions (for class 1 is set to 1, Class 2 — 2; Class 3.1 — 4, Class 3.2 — 8; for class 3.3 — 16; Class 3.4 — 32; Class 4 — 64);
Np — the total number of workplaces production facility.
Identify indicators hazard of working conditions for one workplace class 3.1 and 3.2 by a factor of EMI:
The quantitative value of the index does not depend on exposures and was defined by labor conditions hazard class. The next step was to specify the levels of risk of occupational diseases for personnel by all factors impacting on workplaces. So, for example, for a second engineer ship engine room results of the calculation was presented in Table 1.
Table 1
Levels of risk of occupational diseases for the second engineer ship engine room
| Job title | Harmful factors |
Class conditions labor factor |
Indicator harmful of working conditions (LCHI) |
| Second engineer machine separation vessel | Noise | 3,2 | 8 |
| Temperature | 3,1 | 4 | |
| Illumination | 3,1 | 4 |
Indicator hazard of working conditions on the noise for second engineer ship engine room was 8, the level of risk of occupational disease was defined by Table 2 and refers to the «Medium (significant) risk».
Table 2
Level of risk of occupational diseases, depending on the hazard of working conditions index (LCHI) at the enterprise
| LCHI | The level of risk of occupational diseases of the manufacturing facility |
| LCHI = 1 | No risk |
| LCHI ≤ 2 | Negligible (tolerable) risk |
| 2 < LCHI ≤ 4 | Low (small) risk |
| 4 < LCHI ≤ 8 | Medium (significant) risk |
| 8 < LCHI ≤ 16 | High (intolerable) risk |
| 16 < LCHI ≤ 32 | Very high (intolerable) risk |
| 32 < LCHI ≤ 64 | Ultra-high risk |
Indicator hazard of working conditions by a factor of «temperature» in the operating room as second engineer ship engine room was 4, the level of risk of occupational diseases related to «low (small) risk.»
Indicator hazard of working conditions by a factor of «lack of illumination» in the work area as second engineer ship engine room was 4, the level of risk of occupational diseases related to «Low (small) risk.»
For second engineer ship rate hazard of working conditions by a factor of noise was 8, the level of risk of occupational diseases related to «Medium (significant) risk.» The overall assessment is the worst figure for the mechanics of the engine room of the vessel it was equal to 8.
Evaluation was performed for all 48 seats production facility with classes working conditions 3.1 and 3.2.
Next, we calculated the index of hazard of working conditions for the production facility for the class of 3.1 according to the results WLCCC:
1,17
Indicator values hazard of working conditions for the organization of class 3.1 in the first year of implementation of activities:
Definition of hazard class production facility on Table 3.
Table 3
Definition of hazard class production facility
|
Level of risk |
Class |
Feature class |
| Ultra-high risk | Сlass I | Industrial facility is of extremely high hazard level |
| High (intolerable) risk / very high (intolerable) risk | Сlass II | Industrial facility is of high hazard level |
| Medium (significant) risk | Сlass III | Industrial facility is of medium |
| Low (small) risk | Сlass IV | Industrial facility is low hazard level |
| No risk/
negligible (tolerable) risk |
Сlass V | Industrial facility of minor hazard level |
Table 4 shows the evaluation of the level of risk of occupational diseases in workers manufacturing facility hazard class and dangerous working conditions and jobs hazard class production facility.
Table 4
Risk level of occupational diseases in workers manufacturing facility hazard class and dangerous working conditions and jobs hazard class production facility
| № |
Name production facility |
The level of risk of occupational diseases at the production object as a whole |
Hazard class production facility |
| 1 | Office №1 | None | Class V hazard low hazard |
| 2 | Office №2 | None | Class V hazard low hazard |
| 3 | Office №3 | None | Class V hazard low hazard |
| 4 | Office №4 | None | Class V hazard low hazard |
| 5 | Test laboratory | None | Class V hazard low hazard |
| 6 | Vessel №1 | Medium (significant) risk | Class III hazard medium hazard |
| 7 | Vessel №2 | Medium (significant) risk | Class III hazard medium hazard |
| 8 | Office №5 | Low (small) risk | Class IV hazard low hazard |
Developed with WLCCC recommendations on improvement and improvement of working conditions successfully implemented. On objects 1,2,3 conducted electromagnetic normalization of the situation in the workplace, improved lighting. In the first year of implementation of the Action Plan assessed class working conditions. The results are shown in Table 5.
Table 5
Results of the Action Plan on the results of certification of industrial facilities on labor conditions in the first year of implementation
| № |
Name production facile ty |
The number of jobs |
Number of workers |
Number of workers |
Number of workers
|
|||
| Prior to the implementation of measures | After the implementation of measures | Prior to the implementation of measures | After the implementation of measures | Prior to the implementation of measures | After the implementation of measures | |||
| 1 | Office №1 | 98 | 70 | 88 | 26 | 8 | 2 | — |
| 2 | Office №2 | 32 | 19 | 26 | 13 | 6 | — | — |
| 3 | Office №3 | 14 | 2 | 13 | 12 | 1 | — | — |
| 4 | Office №4 | 19 | 14 | 17 | 3 | 0 | 2* | 2* |
| 5 | Test laboratory | 11 | 10 | 10 | 1 | 1 | ||
| 6 | Vessel №1 | 8 | — | — | 3 | 3 | 5 | 5 |
| 7 | Vessel №2 | 7 | — | — | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 |
| 8 | Office №5 | 34 | 14 | 14 | 5 | 5 | 15 | 15 |
| Altogether | 223 | 129 | 168 | 65 | 26 | 29 | 27 | |
* — intensity on the labor
Assessed level of risk of occupational diseases for workers manufacturing unit (Table 6).
Table 6
Evaluation of CWR for one employee and the whole plant dynamics
| Labor Conditions Hazard Class | LCHI per 1 workplace | Level of risk of occupational disease development for employee |
IHWC on AWWC in the Company |
Hazard Class of industrial facility for the Company |
ILCHI for the Company for the year-end | Hazard class of industrial facility for the Company |
| At any harmful factors Class 3.1 | 4 | Low (small) risk |
1,17 | Negligibly small (portable) risk |
0,47 | Risk missing |
| At any harmful factors Class 3.2 | 8 | Medium (Important) risk |
1,04 | Negligibly small (portable) risk |
0,97 | Risk missing |
Thus, it should be noted the effectiveness of measures and «sensitivity» of the methodology used for assessment.
Discussion and Conclusion. Estimated data of level of risk of occupational diseases for 1 employee following our study are changed from low (minor) to medium (significant) risk. However, when assessing the risk to the company, this difference was reduced to a negligible minor (tolerable) risk.
Assessment of the occupational health and safety system of in the company was made according to the following criteria [2, 7]:
- Increased level of security: the more effective decrease in the highest risks, the more efficient will be measures;
- Latitude impact: the more the number of risks or safety of a larger number of persons is covered by measures the more they will be effective;
- Compliance with the requirements: measures which comply with the requirements shall subject to implementation;
- Adding flexibility to work: If the flexibility of labor due to measures has increased, it should be implemented, although the impact on safety is small;
- Cost-effectiveness: the best measures are not necessarily expensive;
- Very often remarkable results are achieved by minor improvement, almost free of charge;
- Undoubtedly, this assessment boosts the practical relevance of risk assessment of harmful industrial factors impact on personnel health.
CONCLUSIONS
The methodical approaches developed (Figure 1) enable to:
— assess the risk of occupational diseases from harmful factors with personnel;
— determine the hazard class of the industrial facility;
— assess the effectiveness of measures taken to improve labor conditions in the dynamics while implementing scheduled activities, including the removal and mitigation of risks with personnel occupational diseases;
-method is applicable for the assessment of chemical, physical and any other harmful factors identified WLCCC and quantified by
REFERENCES
- Arnold M. Kuzmack, Robert E. McGaughy. Quantitative Risk Assessment for Community Exposure to Vinyl Chloride. Office of Health and Ecological Effects. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1975. Total pages 122.
- BS 8800, 1996, 2004. Guide to Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems. British Standard Institution. Total pages 40.
- GOST R 12.0.006-2002. Group T 58. The State Standard of the Russian Federation. The Occupational Safety Standards. General requirements to the safety and health management in the organization.
- ISO 31000: 2008 and 2009. Risk Management. Principles and Guidelines. Total pages 24.
- Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan. No 188-V dated April 11, 2014 On Civil Protection. Total pages 188.
- Murtonen. Risk assessment at workplace — a practical guide. VTT — Technical Research Centre of Finnish Ministry of Social Security and Public Health. Department of Occupational Safety. Tampere, Finland. Health and Social Security. No.1, 2012. Total pages 78.
- Manual 2.2.755-99. Hygienic assessment criteria and classification of labor conditions by hazard indices and risks in the industrial environment, severity and intensity of the labor process. Total pages 111.
- Methodological recommendations for risk management at hazardous industrial facilities have been agreed by the Order of the Committee for State Control over Emergency Situations and Industrial Safety of the Republic of Kazakhstan. No. 46 dated October 01, 2013. Total pages 47.
- Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process, Committee for the Institutional Means for Assessment of Risks to Public Health, Commission for Life Sciences. National Research Council. NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS. Washington, D.C. 1983. Total pages 191 (URL: (Date of handling 17.06.15).
- RoK Standards 12.0.002-2010. The Occupational Safety Standards. Safety and health management system in the organizations. Guidelines for Assessment and Risk Management.[schema type=»book» name=»RISK ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACT OF PHYSICAL FACTORS ON THE PERSONNEL HEALTH» description=»Analysis and risk assessment of occupational diseases personnel from exposure to physical factors has made to the results of workplaces labor conditions compliance certification (WLCCC) [7] of the production facility in the Republic of Kazakhstan. Measures have been developed to improve working conditions. It was identified and reduced hazard class working conditions of each production site. The effectiveness of these measures was estimated. » author=»Kaidakova Natalya Nickolayevna » publisher=»БАСАРАНОВИЧ ЕКАТЕРИНА» pubdate=»2017-03-07″ edition=»ЕВРАЗИЙСКИЙ СОЮЗ УЧЕНЫХ_27.06.2015_06(15)» ebook=»yes» ]